About your Search

20121128
20121128
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10
of a gripping, terrifying spy novel. you got a bioweapons scientist and covert cia officer who is working on developing all sorts of biological weapons that are used in extreme interrogations. some of those interrogations with the bioweapons result in death. and the cia, what does it do about this? the agent who is involved and apparently who has a discomfort with what he's been doing gets his drinks spiked against the cia. it is an extremely convoluted, intriguing case and as you well outlined but is extremely convoluted. it's ten years old, the kennedy assassination and many if not a all -- >> that is my next question. since it is so old, a number of witnesses they would need, some of his fellow officers now in their 20s or 30s would be in their 70s or 80s. not only could they be dead but their minds are certainly not what they used to be which is always a problem in an old case that comes to court after decades. but in this particular case, just getting evidence, you're talking about getting evidence from the cia. >> well the family is having an extremely difficult time getting evidenc
for this hour. the acting director of the cia met for more than an hour with senators john mccain and lindsey graham along with the u.n. ambassador susan rice. the three senators emerged from the meeting saying they were honored by the fact that the cia director would meet with them, just three random senators and not in some official capacity testifying before committee on the hill. they appreciated the fact that the administration and the intelligence community was going to such lengths to e swaj their concerns to personally answer their questions about the libya attack in a closed-door meeting with the cia director himself, even though these are just three random senators. the senators said their questions were answered as reasonably could be expected and they were willing to consider the president's nominee for secretary of state. they were throwing hear out those nominations fairly and without prejudice. yeah right. that's not the way it went. here's actually what happened after that meeting today. >> we're not going to consider this nomination until we get answers to our concerns. we're
is that the consulate in benghazi was not an embassy of any typical kind. it really looks like a cia listening station. the kind of security arrangements that were in place were inadequate but it wasn't an embassy. when you build an embassy, there's a formal process about the kinds of materials you use and the setback from the street and the kinds of security measures in place. benghazi, you know, didn't rise to that and as a sort of -- so, you know, there's sort of apples and oranges. but the fact is she's introduced a new line of criticism against ambassador rice. >> do you think it's relevant, peter -- do you think it's relevant the question that susan collins is now raising as part of, let's say the president did say, i want susan rice as my secretary of state, they have the process, they go before and the senators consider her, do you think it's legitimate, this issue that she's brought up now? >> well, a, it was 14 years ago. b, al qaeda unfortunately wasn't deemed to be a significant threat and, c, it's not even clear that she, you know, was in any way responsible for the lack of, you know, mov
there was some cia activity there. what exactly it was and what the cia's told involvement was, why there was a consulate there, wasn't even a consulate, didn't do normal consulate duties. what was it all about? by won't know until the investigation is completed and released. >> senator ayotte said when you're an ambassador to the united nations -- i want to get your thoughts on this. she said, look, you go well beyond unclassified talking points in your daily preparation responsibilities. i guess the implication being that she would have been aware of other things that were different or contradicted directly to what she went and said on television. does this cast any doubt on her story? general clark has made what i've heard from everybody who knows her that she is an incredibly honest and forthright person. >> well, i think there's a bigger question here, erin, and that's the credibility of the administration on these national security issues and whether they politicized a national security issue that led to the death of four americans. i mean, i do -- i don't agree that the ameri
cia director has some serious problems as well. president obama pulls out all the stops to keep middle class taxes low, but will congress go along with higher taxes for the rich? plus, a long secret u.s. plan, get this, to explode an atomic bomb on the moon. what were they thinking? i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >>> today we may be at the tipping point for one of the most important decisions president obama needs to make as he begins his second term. on capitol hill republicans including moderate republicans are sending the president a clear warning, don't nominate susan rice to replace hillary clinton as secretary of state. rice is the current u.s. ambassador to the united nations. she spent a second day meeting with senators trying to explain some of her inaccurate comments she made after the september 11th terrorist attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. cnn's senior congressional correspondent dana bash is joining us now from capitol hill with the very latest. what happened today, dana? >> reporter: wolf, it was one thing for susan rice to be criticize
suggesting it was sparked by a spontaneous protest accompanied by acting cia director michael morell, rice explained she was using unclassified talking points which were stripped of references to al qaeda, still classified by the intelligence community. so rice used the word extremist. >> extremist elements came to the consulate as this was unfolding. >> reporter: a source inside the meeting tells cnn rice admitted to gop senators she was aware of classified information suggesting al qaeda was behind the attack, and yet gop senators point out she still said this publicly. >> we have decimated al qaeda. >> reporter: cnn also was told rice tried to clarify to gop senators what she meant was al qaeda's poor leadership has been decimated but gop senators say it is proof rice was putting pre-election spin before national security. >> it was unjustified to give the scenario as presented by ambassador rice and president obama three weeks before an election. >> reporter: ambassador rice, what do you say to republicans who say your comments were politically motivated? rice didn't answer our questio
: tuesday rice acknowledged there was no protest in benghazi, but she blamed the cia, as she did last week. >> i relied solely and squarely on the information provided to me by the intelligence community. i made clear that the information was preliminary. >> reporter: acting cia director mike morel accompanied rice tuesday, in effect her wing man, but it didn't help. >> i'm more troubled today knowing, having met with the acting director of the cia and ambassador rice. >> reporter: both senator kelly ayotte and senator lindsey graham threatened to block rice's nomination. rice did persuade one senator. >> she said what she believed was true, and she was under no political influence from the white house. >> reporter: but joe lieberman is quitting the senate and won't have a vote rice and president obama are closer than he and the iconic hillary clinton. the president has made it clear he will fight for rice and tuesday the white house was not backing down. >> the focus on, some might say obsession on comments made on sunday shows, seems to me and to many to be misplaced. >> reporter: one ve
director of the cia said that the information about the reaction to the video and the protest was wrong and that no one corrected it, including ambassador rice, even though she had left that impression on every single network, op every sunday show. that left me very concerned about that as well. >> did she say to you that she had reviewed intelligence specifically about benghazi, that had the additional information? she couldn't say so publicly. had she reviewed that intelligence? did she affirm that to you or are you assuming that she had? >> she did review it. >> so, in other words, she knew better than what you're saying that she knew better? >> yes. that's one of the questions i have and one of the questions that i didn't feel i got a satisfactory answer to, which is if you knew that even though the classified version, obviously, had references to al qaeda in it being involved or individuals with ties to al qaeda involved in it, how could you not know when you go on every sunday show and not include that fact that it would leave a very different impression to the american people, pa
that. then they call back later and say, forget that, it was us, it was the cia. >> it's like the keystone cops. in the wizard of oz goes the scarecrow goes like this. which way did it go. each pointing in another direction. whether it's the keystone cops and it's shear incompetence, or something else is going on here to me as an american it's not -- we don't even knotphao*eub was e f.b.i. wasn't on site for three weeks. megyn: great to see you. dick durbin will talk about income dave repbgsin differentials in this country. we'll talk about it. megyn: some are calling it the scariest prank ever but it also may be the funnist. however, in between the laughs and the gasps are horror there is a real question about whether this brazilian tv show crossed a legal line with its ghost in an elevator prank. watch. ♪ [screaming] [laughter] megyn: everyone here thinks it's funny, but the question is, is it legal? there could be potential liability here, and we will debate it in today's "kelly's court," i'm taking your tweets on it, follow me@megyn kelly in between now and the court. th
that caused a problem. it was the acting cia director michael murrell who went with her to this meeting with the three republican senators, told them that it was actually the fbi that changed the unclassified talking points that susan rice used and then really made them mad about that. then hours later called back and said, never mind. we were wrong. so they didn't even -- he didn't even have his facts right in that meeting, which really adds fuel to the fire here. >> okay. and not picking on susan rice but i have to lay this by you. i mean, isn't it part rice's personality the editor at large of foreign policy magazine describes rice this way, quote, she's not easy. i'm not sure i'd want to take her on a picnic with my family, but if the president wants her to be secretary of state, she'll work hard. this is from a reuters article. so is it in part that senators aren't used to dealing with a person -- i mean, susan rice just comes out and kind of says things. she's blunt. she's not charming, warm, etcetera. >> or maybe some might say diplomatic which you need for the role of secretary
Search Results 0 to 9 of about 10

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)